Certainly.
With this program, as I mentioned before, at the end of the day it's the minister who appoints the seven experts for each part of the program, who decide which cases get funded.
If they appoint people that all have their own particular view of the Constitution, then it's more likely that they will get the cases before the courts that are more likely to lead to the particular policy outcomes that they prefer.
The way that should work in a democracy is that those particular politicians go to the people and say that this is what they think the law should be and then fight for those particular viewpoints.
We're talking about the program being used as a backdoor way to modify federalism. I think you can think of potential examples where there are provincial laws proposed and the federal government, for political reasons, doesn't want to upset people who support those particular provincial laws, but they disagree, so they just leave it to the Court Challenges Program to bring forward cases that are more likely to shift the jurisprudence in that particular direction.